Mr. Speaker, inflation, rising production costs, shrinking advertising revenues and insufficient funding by Liberal and Conservative governments have led to a $171 million shortfall for CBC/Radio-Canada this year. The icing on the cake is the potential loss of another 5% of its government funding through a strategic review of programs.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times, our government, our political party, has promised in each of our election campaigns to maintain or increase CBC/Radio-Canada budgets. In each of our four budgets, we have increased the corporation's budget. I have in my hands two plans from the Bloc Québécois, the November 2008 plan for reviving the economy and "Agir maintenant", their aid plan of April 2009. Neither contains a single word on CBC/Radio-Canada—not a word. The Bloc says nothing and has no plan on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I suggest two readings for the minister. First, his own budgets, where he will see that CBC/Radio-Canada is losing and, second, the Bloc's first plan, where he will find measures for cultural affairs.

If the minister truly believes in the future of CBC/Radio-Canada, will he commit now to make permanent the additional $60 million granted annually at the eleventh hour, to give it $40 per capita and predictable annual and long term funding?

Mr. Speaker, we will keep the promise we made in the election campaign of maintaining or increasing the budget of CBC/Radio-Canada. That is what we have done. The $60 million for programming for CBC/Radio-Canada is in the budget. We will honour that commitment.

Let us be clear. There is a big difference between us and the Liberal Party. When it formed the government, it cut $414 million from CBC/Radio-Canada, or one third, causing the loss of over 4,000 jobs. We, on the other hand, have honoured our promise and invested in CBC/Radio-Canada.

Mr. Speaker, why is the minister so inflexible? Does she not understand the anguish and distress of patients awaiting testing to obtain an accurate diagnosis concerning the growth of their cancer? Last week the Quebec City and Sherbrooke university medical centres had no choice but to postpone the appointments of anxious patients.

Will the government finally realize that, by stubbornly refusing to act, it is responsible for the delay in providing the appropriate vital treatments?

Mr. Speaker, again, we are working with the medical isotopes experts and they have advised that in terms of alternatives, Thallium-201 can be used. What does that mean for treatment? This can be used as an alternative for most heart tests, which accounts for approximately half of all the Tc-99 procedures in Canada. Iodine-123 can be used to image kidney and thyroid glands. Gallium-67 is used for the detection of Hodgkin's disease and lymphoma, among other things.

That list of alternatives and options was provided by the medical experts on medical isotopes to provinces and territories.

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Pierre Gfeller, of the Lanaudière regional hospital centre, confirms that they are already experiencing supply problems. At the Sherbrooke university medical centre, Dr. Jean Verreault is already receiving much smaller amounts of isotopes, and the number of appointments having to be postponed will likely grow. At the Quebec City university medical centre and at the one affiliated with Laval University, supplies have dropped below 20%.

Does the government realize that, because of its inaction and incompetence, it has created a major health crisis?

Mr. Speaker, again, let me repeat that the medical experts community has advised of alternatives that are available to provinces and territories. That means other isotopes can be used to assist provinces and territories in managing their supplies. The alternatives, such as thallium, iodine or gallium, can be used in the provinces and territories to deal with the shortage.

Mr. Speaker, for three and a half years the Conservative government has shown contempt for scientific opinion, but when it puts stubborn ideology ahead of patient health and safety, it has gone too far. The president-elect of the Society of Nuclear Medicine said, “It's going to be a disaster”.

Doctors are not alarmists, but they are worried that their patients will not get the critical nuclear medical imaging tests they need.

Does the Conservative government not realize that its strategy of deny, deny, deny is putting Canadians at risk?

Mr. Speaker, since 2007, government and health care providers have developed contingency measures to minimize the impact on patients. That includes using alternative isotopes such as thallium for cardiac scanning.

This morning I again had a conference call with the medical experts community in how we are managing this situation. In terms of how to move forward, we are meeting with them this weekend to again discuss how we can provide assistance and alternatives to the provinces and territories.

Mr. Speaker, this rhetoric is getting to be unacceptable. The government's inaction is jeopardizing critical patient care in B.C. In Victoria, Dr. Kevin Forkheim said the shortage of medical isotopes will affect already stressed diagnostic services on Vancouver Island.

At Northern Health, which services 300,000 people, the director of diagnostics said they could be forced to cancel nuclear imaging tests before the end of June.

Will the Conservatives finally admit we are facing a crisis in patient care? Will they act to protect Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I have been in regular contact with my provincial and territorial counterparts in managing this situation. The medical expert community has provided alternatives for procedures in the provinces and territories. I continue to meet with the medical experts in managing this situation.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect that when a serious crime is committed in this country the individual responsible for the crime will face an appropriate sentence, but for far too long in this country, individuals convicted of murder have been eligible to apply for parole.

Why are the rights of criminals being placed ahead of the rights of law-abiding citizens, and what message does this send to the families of murder victims and their communities?

Could the minister explain how the government's faint hope legislation will help victims of crime in this country?

Mr. Speaker, this government believes that the crime of murder deserves serious time, and this is why we are getting rid of the loophole for lifers. Criminals who commit first or second degree murder will no longer be able to apply for early parole. We are going to support those families who do not want to be victimized over and over again at parole hearings. We stand by those victims.

The Liberals and the NDP have not made up their minds on this legislation, but Canadians have, and they say to pass this legislation.

Last week, the Prime Minister threw out his own rules on ministerial responsibility. Today, there is an attempt in court to muzzle the press and keep a taped conversation from being heard. The Minister of Justice says the government is not a party and would have us believe that this injunction is the work of the same, now unemployed, 26-year-old former staffer it used as a scapegoat last week.

Will the Minister of Justice tell the House who is bankrolling the injunction in Halifax to muzzle the press?